Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Ligand (LGND) Breakout! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jayhawk969 who wrote (25718)	9/23/1998 4:00:00 PM
From: Henry Niman	Respond to of 32384

JD, Just to clarify, LGND really has two major platforms, both of which seek to identify small molecules. One technology (IR) seeks small molecules that are analogues of other small molecules (non-polypeptide hormones). The other technology (STATs) seeks small molecules that will mimic the effect of large molecules (polypeptide hormones), either at the beginning of the signal transduction pathway (on the cell surface) or the end of the pathway (in the cell nucleus). I'm not sure how broad or narrow the MLNM program is. They work on leptin receptors (which would involve the polypeptide hormone mimics) as well as HNF1 (which is a non-polypeptide hormone receptor). If most or all of the Bayer program targets polypeptide hormone mimics, then you are correct in your assumption that the deal places a high price tag on the technology. Of interest, would be the portion of the polypeptide hormone mimics program that might target the receptor itself. LGND may very well get a very broad patent in this area, and could theoretically get a piece of the action if the issued patents are broad, and MLNM includes screening for mimics that act through binding directly to the polypeptide hormone receptor.

To: jayhawk969 who wrote (25718)	9/23/1998 4:26:00 PM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

Nice point. Think I remember that Bayer also paid more than twice what Chiron paid for its' diagnostic unit, and way above what the market was valuing it at as part of Chirons stock market capitalization. While the deal itself is obviously of interest I think the implications are also important. I certainaly did not see Bayer doing either deal but I would like to hear from anyone that did or who could provide insights into the type of companies Hoechst, BASF, DuPont or Merck might consider targets.